GasBuddy News Article

52

votes

Keystone XL breaks ground in Texas

The Washington Post
--
Early last year, TransCanada started the Keystone pipeline with little fuss or fanfare. It runs from Canada to Steele City, Neb., then east to Wood River and Patoka, Ill. And it got the required permits from the State Department and other agencies.

The company’s next pipeline, the Keystone XL, followed a different route on the ground — and in the political arena, kicking up controversy.

Why didn’t TransCanada use the same route as for the Keystone line?

The first pipeline entered the United States farther to the east and ran down the eastern edge of Nebraska, farther from the state’s ecologically sensitive Sandhills and Ogallala Aquifer.

From wiki " It consists of the operational "Keystone Pipeline" and "Keystone-Cushing Extension", and two proposed pipeline expansion segments, referred to as Keystone XL Pipeline and the Gulf Coast Project. After the Keystone XL pipeline segments are completed, American crude oil would enter the XL pipelines at Baker, Montana and Cushing, Oklahoma.[1]"

And according to the 1975 EPCA act since the XL segment from Hardisty to Baker Wyoming to Steele City Nebraska (separate drone the original Keystone from Hardisty to Steele City) will carry US Bakken crude, thus commingled with Canadian crude, the oil cannot be exported unless the President deems export is in the national interest (very rarely has this ever happened).

It is little more than a rubber-stamp process, with no safegaurds, no verifications, no accountability. And despite recent propositions placed on the state ballot, the laws as passed still do not address the underlying problem of the proper use of Eminent Domain.

Back to the discussion.

TransCanada has been trying to use the "shortest-route" argument as the entire basis for its environmental assessments of the pipeline's impact. It is a faulty-logic argument, in that it treats all "disturbances" the same. That is, that the short-term environmental "disturbance" of construction is of equal to the long-term consequences of a spill.

And given TransCanada's poor track record for the already completed sections of the pipeline - 35 reportable spills/leaks in the first year of operation - it does not bode well for a pipeline of even longer length transiting the central U.S.

The "shortest-route" argument is the reason why there was such objection by Nebraska landowners.

And now that other landowners have seen this, they too chose to fight-back.

Do realize, there has already been one landowner that HAS been successful in preventing the Keystone XL pipeline from crossing her property.

Interesting to read this right after reading how they are going to start building on private property before they go through the legal proceedings.I'm just gonna drive this Prius off the lot because I put in the car loan application...

“There are already many pipelines that are operating successfully, I don't know why this one would be any different.”

Mostly because of what would be in it — a highly corrosive, low net energy product that is mined (not drilled) at great expense and with huge environmental problems that Canada seems disinterested in addressing. We do not need it.

Alberta’s tar-sands oil is one of the dirtiest sources of energy and also has a very low net energy content. Mining it is creating an environmental disaster in the Canadian sub-arctic; it would be good if the Canadians woke up to what these tar-sands projects are doing to their country. And in a perverse effect, the XL pipeline would be likely to cause midwestern gas prices to increase. Building the southern leg may help reduce the oil bottleneck at Cushing but north of Cushing the rest of it will just import junk oil we do not need.

No wonder Koch brainwashing works so well. I can't believe how elated people are to stuff more money in to the brothers pockets, while they put Canada's and the United States natural resources at risk. How can everyone think this is going to benefit both countries in some way? The facts are widely available, neither country will see a drop of the refined tar sands. We will only see another yacht in the water for the brothers.

Keystone XL = Higher Price at the pump! All this does is allow Canada to deliver their oil to port where it can be sold on the world market. Right now the oil is land locked and has a lower price. Just watch... This will lead to environmental issues in the USA and higher profits for Canada!